[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 78 (Tuesday, June 14, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6494-S6495]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
______
SENATE RESOLUTION 171--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE
PRESIDENT SHOULD SUBMIT TO CONGRESS A REPORT ON THE TIME FRAME FOR THE
WITHDRAWAL OF UNITED STATES TROOPS FROM IRAQ
Mr. FEINGOLD submitted the following resolution; which was referred
to the Committee on Armed Services:
S. Res. 171
Whereas United States forces in Iraq have served with
courage and distinction and they and their families deserve
to know what exactly their mission is and approximately how
long they may expect to remain in Iraq;
Whereas establishing time frames for the transfer of
sovereignty and for elections in Iraq has resulted in real
political and strategic advantages for the United States and
has advanced the development of democracy in Iraq;
Whereas establishing a clear time frame for the withdrawal
of United States troops from Iraq would help to refute
conspiracy theories and eliminate suspicions that obstruct
the United States policy goals in Iraq and undermine the
legitimacy of the Government of Iraq;
Whereas President George W. Bush stated on April 13, 2004
that ``as a proud and independent people, Iraqis do not
support an indefinite occupation and neither does America''
and that United States troops will remain in Iraq ``as long
as necessary and not one day more'';
Whereas a sound strategic plan for United States military
operations in Iraq would include information regarding the
numbers of Iraqi troops that must be effectively trained and
the amount of time that will be required to train them;
Whereas the President has declined to set out specific
goals for the United States military operations in Iraq or a
clear time frame for achieving such goals;
Whereas a clear plan and time frame for United States
military operations in Iraq would facilitate more responsible
budgeting for the costs of United States operations in Iraq;
and
Whereas confusion about the United States mission in Iraq
does not serve the United States vital interests in
establishing stability in Iraq or fighting the terrorist
networks that continue to threaten the United States: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That--
(1) the Senate--
(A) supports the men and women of the Armed Forces of the
United States in Iraq and deeply appreciates their admirable
service; and
[[Page S6495]]
(B) recognizes that stability, democracy, and respect for
the rule of law in Iraq are in the United States national
interest; and
(2) it is the sense of the Senate that--
(A) the United States should remain committed to providing
long-term diplomatic and political support to the people of
Iraq to achieve stability and democracy;
(B) the United States should work diligently to accelerate
the sound and effective training of Iraqi security forces and
to increase international cooperation in this endeavor so
that the people of Iraq may assume responsibility for their
own security;
(C) the United States should continue to pursue a robust
and multi-faceted campaign to dismantle and defeat
international terrorist networks in Iraq and around the
world; and
(D) not later than 30 days after the date that the Senate
agrees to this resolution, the President should submit to
Congress a report that describes--
(i) the remaining mission of the Armed Forces of the United
States in Iraq;
(ii) current estimates of the time frame required for the
United States to achieve that mission, including information
regarding variables that could alter that time frame; and
(iii) a time frame for the subsequent withdrawal of United
States troops from Iraq.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today, I am submitting a resolution that
addresses a gaping hole in the administration's rhetoric and strategy
with respect to Iraq. My resolution calls on the President to define
the mission of our military in Iraq, and to issue a plan and timeframe
for accomplishing that mission. It has been over 2 years since the
President launched the war in Iraq, but we still don't have a defined
mission or timeframe that would allow us to hold ourselves accountable
for giving the military the tools they need to succeed in achieving
those goals. My resolution also calls for a plan for the subsequent
withdrawal of U.S. troops, so that we can provide some clarity with
regard to our intentions and restore confidence at home and abroad that
there is an end date in mind.
This resolution does not establish a timeframe for troop withdrawal--
that is for our military commanders to determine. Any such timeframe
has to be flexible--there are variables that will affect how quickly
various missions can be accomplished. But it's hard to conceive of an
effective strategic plan that isn't linked to some timetables.
The rationale for our military action in Iraq has changed over time.
The projections regarding the resources that would be required were
wrong. And now we seem to be in the midst of some vague policy of
muddling through. When I speak to servicemen and women in Wisconsin and
in Iraq, and when I speak to their families, their pride in their
service is evident and it is well-earned. But their frustration with
this open-ended commitment, with the stop-loss orders and the multiple
deployments, with the extensions and the uncertainties, is equally
evident, and it is painful. We can do better by them, by insisting on
clarity, by insisting on accountability, and by assuring them that we
have a plan with clear and achievable goals.
In fact, by leveling with the American people about our commitment in
Iraq, the administration can regain some of their confidence. After the
shifting justifications for this war, after the premature declarations
of ``mission accomplished,'' after the exciting and inspiring
elections, we still don't have any kind of finish line for our military
engagement in Iraq. The American people and our troops deserve a sound
plan that is linked to real timeframes and real achievements.
A real timeframe will also help us achieve our security goals in
Iraq. The most common argument against clarifying how long we plan to
keep troops in Iraq goes something like this: If we reveal a timetable,
insurgents and terrorists will simply lie in wait, emerging in force to
achieve their goals once we are gone.
But any responsible timetable for U.S. withdrawal would be based just
on the establishment of a competent Iraqi force. Americans won't leave
until that force has the training it needs to succeed. An Iraqi force,
which would not suffer from shortages of translators or struggle to
bridge the cultural divide, is the right force to handle any resurgent
threat.
Contrary to the conventional wisdom, the administration's refusal to
set a plan and timetable about just how long vast numbers of U.S.
troops will remain in Iraq is actually an advantage for insurgents and
terrorists. This large U.S. military presence smack in the middle of
the Arab world is a major recruiting tool for international terrorist
networks, and young men are coming to Iraq from around the world to get
on-the-job training in attacking Americans. These foreign forces are
motivated by our presence, and they feed off conspiracy theories and
suspicions regarding American intentions. When I was in Baghdad in
February, a very senior coalition officer confided to me that he
believed a public U.S. timetable for withdrawing from Iraq would ``take
the wind out of the sails'' of the insurgents.
What's more, the indefinite presence of vast numbers of American
troops could also undercut the legitimacy of the Iraqi government in
the eyes of many--ironically, destabilizing Iraq despite our best
intentions. Having a timetable for the transfer of sovereignty and
having a timetable for Iraqi elections have resulted in real political
and strategic advantages for the U.S. Having a timetable for the
withdrawal of troops should be no different.
Clear plans could also help lead to responsible budgeting. This
administration has bypassed the regular budget process, placing
hundreds of billions of dollars on the country's tab, on the grounds
that requirements are simply ``unknowable'' and cannot be incorporated
into responsible budget planning. This is simply not credible, and
continuing to mortgage our children's future with these irresponsible
policies is unacceptable. It is time to hold ourselves accountable for
the costs of this war, time to accept the tough choices that come with
responsible budgeting, and time to insist on sound planning and clarity
about all of this is going.
This resolution is not some kind of cut-and-run strategy, or a call
to bring all of our troops home now, regardless of what remains to be
achieved on the ground. It is clear to me that we still have military
missions on the ground--most notably, training the Iraqi forces to
provide for their own security. Moreover, a military response--as well
as a diplomatic response, and a financial response--is vital in
combating terrorist networks in Iraq and elsewhere. It may well be that
some units--perhaps special forces--will be operating in Iraq in
coordination with the Iraqi military well into the future as part of
the counterterrorism strategy that we need to be pursuing around the
world, not just in Iraq.
But Mr. President, the military is only one part of solving the
puzzle that we face in Iraq. For many years to come, we will have to
work diligently to combat a burgeoning culture of corruption in Iraq,
or the rule of law doesn't stand a chance. We need to make
reconstruction work and deliver real democracy dividends for the Iraqi
people, and this work will go on for some time. Intense American
diplomatic and political engagement and support are likely to continue
long after all or most of the troops are withdrawn.
Our troops on the ground are truly amazing in their resolve, their
professionalism, and their sincere desire to help the people of Iraq.
Their courage and commitment was underscored for me during my trip to
Iraq earlier this year. I want to help these brave men and women
succeed, by insuring that they have an achievable mission, sound
planning, and a reasonable timeframe in which to finish their part of
the job.
____________________